TheAgitator.com
That Means Everybody Just Cool Out
Thursday, June 11th, 2009I wrote a long post last night in response to the almost-giddy response from the left to yesterday’s Holocaust Museum shooting, the gist of which is that this shows how foolish those of us who objected to that DHS report about “right-wing extremists” a few months ago really are.
I didn’t like how the post came out, and I wrote it while still seething from reading the nearly jubilant Twitter feeds of several prominent lefty bloggers. So I didn’t put it up. Fortunately, my colleague Jesse Walker today expressed exactly what I was thinking, only more eloquently.
I’d add that some of these media characterizations of the shooter as “anti-government” are gratuitous. He didn’t shoot up the Federal Reserve. He shot up the Holocaust Museum, because he hates Jews.
Jesse’s point about the right is true, too. Trying to string together three homicidal incidents out of hundreds from the last few months as evidence of some rising, violent, anti-government movement is just as absurd as Michelle Malkin’s attempts over the last few years to try find evidence of a mounting nationwide jihad every time someone with a Muslim name commits a crime.
Of course if that Holocaust Museum was in Texas, Kinky Friedman would have been there to put a bullet in that Nazi’s ass.
I think the media reporting on this is laughable at best. However, it does demonstrate how, when a situation may actually require critical thinking, that the newsmedia has dumbed down so many stories, they themselves have become dumb in the process.
Because this guy doesn’t fit into a “liberal” or “conservative” pigeonhole, they run in circles trying to actually classify him. It is like they HAVE to associate him with some group so that the mindless readers/viewers can then presumably know everything else about him. (ie. oh, he’s a right-wing hate monger, he must also be involved with that abortion shooting and probably quotes bible verses at inappropriate times and obviously hates black people).
The fact of the matter is, in doing so, the level of political discourse has devolved into left versus right with no discussion of some other way. Further, it has forced everyone into a group rather than individuals.
At the end of the day, the proper answer to “who is the shooter?” is that he is ONE whacked out INDIVIDUAL.
sorry to have gone off on such a tangent. maybe I shouldn’t try to play connect the dots all the time.
One crazy 88-year old alleged racist attacking a hardened facility (multiple armed guards, security cameras, alarms, etc.) with a .22 caliber target rifle and 13 bullets isn’t a terrorist act.
It’s an economical suicide attempt during a Recession.
Best to still blame it on George W. Bush…..like everything else.
Firstly, DHS is never going to be able to intercept acts like the Holocaust Museum shooting, or abortion doctor killings, or probably even Oklahoma City style bombings where two or three guys get together, communicate entirely in person, and operate largely within the limits of most ordinary citizens.
Secondly, while those types of attacks will kill people, they do not threaten the security of the country in a way that demands a war response (as the 9/11 attacks did).
The problem we have in the war on terror is that everything is now being called terrorist act and is used to expand government power. They will never be able to stop these small attacks, so the power grabs will never cease. I don’t want DHS working in that realm. Leave that shit to local city and state law enforcement and keep DHS focused on serious threats from organized groups that have the resources to bring mass destruction down on the U.S. Furthermore, if they make use of legal investigative powers that exceed traditional power granted to law enforcement for fighting ordinary crime, they should not be able to use any evidence collected under that power to prosecute for anything short of a crime that seriously threatens national security. The only way to keep them from using those powers for ordinary law enforcement is to eliminate their usefulness for that purpose.
Unfortunately, like most national politically motivated law enforcement these days, DHS is reactionary, focusing on the scare of the week, and expedient, using methods that win them quick easy victories (like entrapment schemes).
You mean both the left and the right are nothing more than corrupt frauds who believe that their righteous ends justify any despicable means of acquiring power, even to the point of capitalizing on a tragedy and outright lying about how the “other side” is composed exclusively of evil psychopaths who hate Children and America and think Hitler was an ok guy? Inconceivable.
Walker is right — it’s classic guilt by association. There are thoughtful, tolerant people who realize the expansion of government power is the biggest threat facing this country, and there are racist nutjobs who are only “anti-government” in the sense that the current government isn’t sufficiently totalitarian. Leftists can’t deal with the arguments of the former, so must stereotype them as the latter.
#2, that is the most lucid post I’ve read in a while. Bravo.
As for the old, racist fart – he was nowhere near a terrorist. This guy was just a lonely old man who was either tired of his life and decided to commit suicide-by-cop (and gain White Supremacist notoriety at the same time) or was just crazy enough to think that he could bust in there and kill a bunch of people and still walk out, get in his car, and continue his normal life. (hint: I vote for #1).
I’d add that some of these media characterizations of the shooter as “anti-government” are gratuitous. He didn’t shoot up the Federal Reserve. He shot up the Holocaust Museum, because he hates Jews.
I agree with the general tenor of your remarks, but this point leaves me confused. He didn’t shoot up the Federal Reserve–but he tried to, or at least tried to kidnap board members and put them on TV in a show trial. I don’t get why you bring up the Federal Reserve at all.
Recently, a Muslim shot up a military recruiting center, killing one. But if you claimed he was on the “front edge” of a renewed Muslim assault, the lib bloggers would laugh you out of the room.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/us/10brfs-KILLINGOFSOL_BRF.html
However, drawing an equally preposterous conclusion about the direction of a multi-billion dollar agency from two murders (abortion clinic, yesterday) – that’s totally OK.
I think there are two points that bear repeating:
From Radley:
and from the reason article describing the DHS report:
Both were right on target. While I’m one that believes Islam is absolutely a threat to every democracy on the planet (believed it for 25 years), that doesn’t mean every stinking crime committed by a muslim should be touted as proof of a worldwide jihad. Constant misrepresentations by the left and the right diminish the actual and real problem of extremism of all stripes.
One last thing to repeat:
“sorry to have gone off on such a tangent. maybe I shouldn’t try to play connect the dots all the time.”
In honor of the John Wayne post, allow me to say, “Don’t apologize, Mr. Mojopin. It’s a sign of weakness.”
And kidding aside, you did pretty good anyhow.
As far as social politics go it appears he was way more “left” than “right.”
http://frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=35192
I’m confused about the “Federal Reserve” comment too- he served 6 years for trying to kidnap members of the Federal Reserve. So what if he didn’t shoot the place up?
2009:
When someone whose motives can be linked to the right shoots something up, people on left slam the people on the right for creating the atmosphere and applaud the government’s reaction to them, and the people on the right complain about how this is totalitarian and that they had nothing to do with it, but even though they condemn the violence, they can see how the horrible things the left did would anger someone in this way.
2001-2008:
Just swap “left” and “right.”
It’s even the same people from each side, who are now taking the opposite position — like after halftime in football. Why do we take any of these people seriously any more? I agree with Brandon.
So, we can take as evidence that there is no global jihad from the -
DC beltway sniper John Malvo (Muslim),
The Utah mall shooter last year (who received a Muslim hero’s burial in Bosnia),
and the latest example (among several) of the Army Recruiting office shooting (who openly claims that he acted to “defend” Islam).
These are all just acts of random nut-jobs.
Yeah, sure. They may not be a part of a organized, specific, jihadist act such as 9/11, but they share a definite underlying philosophy – Islam, which preaches hatred and encourages acts of violence on non-believers.
Its going to get worse. Much worse.
@Brian Moore — Yes. I don’t hold with conspiracy theories, but sometimes it looks an awful lot like the two sides just switch uniforms from time to time: “Okay, this decade it’s our turn to be the Globetrotters, and yours to be the Washington Generals.”
Scott,
That’s no different than the sort of logic that blames video games for Columbine.
Every new murder motivated by something other than greed or jealousy is being hyped as evidence that Armageddon is right around the corner AND WE’D BETTER DO SOMETHING BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE!
Sorry, but I don’t buy it.
I heard von Brunn was sexting before he opened fire.
… but when a Muslim blows up a cafe with innocent folks inside, the right will start repeating “I don’t understand why those darn Muslim clerics don’t tell these guys to just settle down?”
What you have over there and over here are radicals who spew hate and try to frame those who do not believe as they do into criminals or sub-human creatures. The fanatics that listen to the radicals hear the message, and try to “do something” about it. The radical blowhards are the fuses that set the fanatics off.
It’s not every hardcore believer that we need to watch out for. For example, I was a firm believer that this country would have been much, much better off without Bush/Cheney. But no matter what I read or heard, I wasn’t going to take matters into my own hands – I trusted the existing set of laws and rules to take care of their removal (even if it meant waiting for attrition to kick in). I’d bet there were folks on the right who felt the save during President Clinton’s terms.
But when you get those scheiss-for-brains blowhards spewing continuous hate and lies and setting these fanatics off, they need to look in the mirror and review how they work and what they say.
“the power grabs will never cease.”
This will be true until the heat death of the universe where there are no protons left. :)
Good link by Barbasol. People often fail, or refuse, to realize that nationalism, whether it’s driven by race or other identity politics, has socialism as a core belief. Nazi’s thought of themselves as socialists (fascism, socialism, I don’t see any reason to split hairs here) and their neo adherents aren’t any different. There isn’t anything remotely conservative about them whatsoever.
But thanks to people like Michael Savage and the like, the right has done a very poor job proving that distinction and they probably aren’t smart enough to realize that they are partly responsible for sewing these seeds of misconception.
Holy Christ! I can’t believe the main stream media can not distinguish between the nuances of all the different groups or individuals who hate the federal government, and think they can change the world by shooting up a place. Christ! Even an elementary school student knows this shit.
The posturing from the Right and Left wings of the American political circus is annoying after these tragedies. The real lesson people should take from this is that fascists kill. Sometimes you have to get them before they get you, because they aren’t the most reasonable folks.
RIP Officer Johns. Nazi punks, fuck off (hat tip to Jello)!!!
Does anyone else find it quite odd that our first black president has something in common with white Supremists in that they both hate Israel?
John | June 11th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Does anyone else find it quite odd that our first black president has something in common with white Supremists in that they both hate Israel?
Actually, John, what I find odd is your question. As your premise is factually not true, at least from the President’s public statements, but if you are one of those chaps who can secretly read everything behind what is happening in the world, please, do tell. How often do you see the un-marked helicopters? Have you joined a militia? Are you stockpiling arms and ammunitions?
David,
You might want to check out a book on logic.
“He didn’t shoot up the Federal Reserve. He shot up the Holocaust Museum, because he hates Jews.”
I found this odd too, given that he had ALREADY tried to attack the Fed. In his crazy mind, according to his own writings, that efforts failed because of “Jews.” So maybe this was his demented attempt to try and make a symbolic strike at what he saw as the core of the problem that stood against his previous effort.
I agree that the gloating isn’t warranted. However, there’s no question that this guy thrived partly in an environment of ridiculous anti-government conspiracy nutjobbery, and as such, it’s definitely a reminder that some people, you know, actually BELIEVE that stuff. I think that’s a decent reason for critics of anything to include some measure and humanism in their criticism. Good criticism is specific about its boundaries, and making them clear helps make that criticism more persuasive.
O’Reilly and others, for instance, called Tiller an inhuman monster, an executioner, a man on par with the Nazis. Well, guess what folks: you know what we did with the Nazis? We KILLED those guys. That’s what we do with monsters. Now, you can make a case that maybe there are higher order reasons why, in our society, in our time, we should respect the rule of law enough to avoid that sort of action as a special case. But the point is that O’Reilly and others used their rhetoric without making that higher order point. And they did it without noting that Tiller was a passionate human being with a family that thought he was helping women, whether you think that was wrong or right.
They’re not responsible for the actions of a dude who did something they themselves would never have endorsed. But it still should be a wakeup call to them that’s it IMPORTANT to moderate your rhetoric by establishing a ceiling on it, and some perspective. That might not stop crazy people. But on the other hand, it might burst their bubble enough to make them think twice.
Yeah, you’re probably right. Where can I get the one that says correlation=causation? That is the one I’d need, after all.
“As far as social politics go it appears he was way more “left” than “right.”
http://frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=35192”
Yeah, real big supporter of gay marriage, abortion, and so on there.
I’m not sure how being anti-Christian counts one way or the other, and Brunn was a fan of something much closer to national socialism and farm subsidies, not public health insurance.
Calling him a leftist or a rightist really doesn’t make a lot of sense in the end. He had a worldview orthogonal to pretty much what everyone in either of those categories has.
“I’d add that some of these media characterizations of the shooter as “anti-government” are gratuitous. He didn’t shoot up the Federal Reserve. He shot up the Holocaust Museum, because he hates Jews.”
I’m a long time reader of your blog, but you’re not thinking clearly about this.
The nutjob had a history of violence and served prison time for his previous attack on people at the Fed.
That, alone, would be enough to make the “anti government” label apt.
When you read any of the nutty ravings he has previously made and that have not been posted, there is no way that any rational person could fairly argue that he is anything other than an anti-government nutjob.
No David, you need the one that explains to you that YOUR statement about video games being analogous to my statement is non-sensical.
Whatever his views about what the “socialism” he favored were, the dude was just not on Daily Kos ranting about how WalMart should allow unionization or we should nationalize health insurance. He was on Free Republic ranting about international banking conspiracies and Obama’s birth certificate.
How anyone could call someone that wrote stuff like this a wacky leftist is beyond me:
“Love him or hate him, we all remember how the press went to great lengths to find out every move that President Bush made … finally unable to come up with anything factual, so they created it! When their accusations were proven empty, they refused to retract one word of the fraud they perpetrated on the American people.
Dan Rather lost his job over fraudulent documents, because common people like you & me reached out and ripped CBS to pieces. They couldn’t stand the loss of sponsors OR viewers!
The same Media went to great lengths to scandalize & destroy Sarah Palin. She maintains a 91% approval rating among voters from all parties, thanks to the Internet and investigative journalists who don’t work for the mainstream media.”
See, the “left” wants to identify him with the “right”, which means pointing out all his typical conservative behavior, like rabid racism, which of course all conservatives share. Meanwhile, the “right” wants to paint him as a “leftist”, so they talk about how he doesn’t believe in Christianity, since you have to be an athiest to be a liberal.
Let us all sing “Kum Ba Yah” as we bask in the glow of mutual understanding.
As mojotron, drew, and tde have pointed out, he was imprisoned for going after the Federal Reserve. Now I suppose one can argue that he wasn’t against Government but the Jews he thought were running the FRB etc, but that should have been stated.
His politics are irrelevant. Unless he was part of a larger plot, he’s just a another random nut. As such, it’s as unfair for people to try tie these things to their political enemies/things they want banned. That won’t stop people from conveniently finding that the latest incident proves what they’ve been saying all along.
I think the rest of the public nods along because it’s easier to accept than the awful truth that there’s nothing you can do to stop random nuts from killing people.
His politics _are_ relevant in that they are at least semi-coherent and appear to be a motivator for his actions (as opposed to him acting out of pure psychosis). But there are degrees of relevance, and the lack of an organized plot means other white supremacists can’t be punished for his crime — but his crime does reflect the overall moral degeneracy of white supremacists. Heaven forbid a nuanced argument.
Playing devil’s advocate, suppose some Chomskyite loon brought a gun into the Cato Institute and began robbing people, on the theory that “right wing libertarians” are apologists for “private tyrannies”, and their money should be expropriated and sent to, say, Venezuela. Would so many of you subscribe to the “lone wacko” theory in that case? Or would you realize an ideology can be blamed when someone puts it into practice, while still not advocating the repression of said ideology?
Yeah, Barbasol. Frontpagemag is such an unbiased source. I wonder what that paragon of journalistic virtue Rush Limbaugh thinks.
I agree with Matt #38 that Von Brunn’s politics are indeed relevant –very relevant– since they seem to be his actual motive.
Beyond that…I think it’s strange that one would get stuck on the “nearly jubilant Twitter feeds of several prominent lefty bloggers” when we’re talking about exactly the type of right-wing extremist the much-maligned DHS warned against.
This is taken verbatim from the DHS report: “Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or
rejecting government authority entirely.”
When it comes to Von Brunn, check and check.
You don’t like the gloating, fine. But have some perspective. You should be mad at Von Brunn himself for doing all he can to prove the DHS report was ON THE MONEY when it came to right-wing extremism. But by all means, be mad at the lefties for saying, “See? There was no conspiracy after all.”
I don’t think ideology causes events like the holocaust museum shooting anymore than Grand Theft Auto caused Columbine. It may provide an excuse, but not a cause. There will always be those few people who are predisposed to violence under certain circumstances. After an event happens, it’s simply human nature to try and come up with a quick simple explanation.
Why didn’t the DHS report zero in on postal employees as a risk? They’ve been involved in more incidents and (excluding Oklahoma City) have killed more people over the last couple decades than right wing extremists.
I don’t like it when people are quick to declare open season on “extremists”. The word extremist is not interchangeable with murderous and characterizing an entire class of people based on the actions of a very tiny subset of that group is precisely what we complain about when the media and government try to paint all gamblers and drug dealers/users with the same brush.
I consider myself an extreme libertarian and proud of it. That doesn’t make me dangerous and it doesn’t warrant more government attention.
I heard von Brunn was sexting before he opened fire.
So he was committing a terrorist act!
[...] Waco “Blowback” to Suppress Dissent More on Bonnie Erbe The Brown Scare of ‘09 The Agitator’s take on all of this — Justin M. StoddardComments (1) 1 [...]